Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D06-0035
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/11/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/21/2007 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 17, 2007 To: Bruce Wilson, EEC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Tom Porter (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: Hermosa Village Senior Apartments Development Plan – 2nd Submittal D06-0035 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet 1: The descriptions of the sewer elements in the legend should include the word PRIVATE or PUBLIC whichever is applicable. Sheet 1: The private sewer line on property should be called BCS not HCS. Sheet 2 : The FUE count given for the car wash seems unusually low please explain or revise. Sheet 3 and 4: The cleanout rim and invert elevations need to be shown. Also the pipe size of the BCS needs to be shown. Sheet 3 and 4: There should be a cleanout located at the intersection of the east running BCS and the north running BCS. Also the slopes/length and material of pipe for the BCS needs to be shown on plan. There needs to be more cleanouts on the north running section at least every 100’. Sheet 3 and 4: The sewer directional flow arrows are missing for both the public and private sewer. Sheet 3 and 4: The sewer easement should be marked as released not abandoned. Also the 30’ public sewer easement west of property is still not shown on plan. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the 3rd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $117.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me at the telephone number shown under my signature on the first page of this letter CC: Project File |
| 05/24/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D06-0035 VALENICA CAR WASH/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: May 24, 2007 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. NOTE: Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. jg |
| 05/25/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Trash enclosure detail B sheet 5, Gates must be constructed with the ability to be secured in the open postion during service. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4 Recommend identify and annotate " quantity of 4-1in. dia. x 6in. long galvanized pipe to be flush with concrete". Locate so gates can be secured in open position at minimum of 180 degrees. 2. It Appears service vehicle can exit at NE corner of lot through 32ft PAAL. Please clarify and demonstrate truck path on DP for maneuverability. Access and approach to enclosure area works otherwise. Please make corrections upon resubmittal. |
| 05/31/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 06/01/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D06-0035 Valencia Car Wash 06/01/07 () Tentative Plat ( X ) Development Plan ( X ) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-05-10 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway COMMENTS DUE BY: June 11, 2007 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies ( ) See Additional Comments Attached ( X ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 9/18/06 ( X ) No Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: 5/30/07 |
| 06/04/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/04/2007 | WILLDAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | June 4, 2007 City of Tucson Development Services P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, AZ 85726 RE: VALENCIA CARWASH – 1ST REVIEW CITY OF TUCSON LOG NO. D06-0035 WILLDAN PROJECT NO. 16608-7001 The initial review for the above project has been completed. This letter contains comments which need to be addressed by written responses to each which indicate any actions taken. In order to facilitate a shorter second review, all corrections and revisions must be made on the original plans and two complete new sets of prints, along with one complete redlined set, must be returned to our office. To avoid delays, ensure that all corrections have been made, are complete, and have been coordinated on all applicable detail and note sheets. Pen or pencil corrections on final prints are not acceptable. Should you have questions regarding the comments herein, please contact your plans examiners, David Gue. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: The Drainage Report is insubstantial compliance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 11 of the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, Arizona, subject to the minor comments listed below. Page 7 In the second paragraph verify that the offsite runoff approaching the site’s south side at CP-5, totaling 7.4 CFS also includes runoff from CP-6. In the third paragraph – last sentence therein – ponding limits are shown on Figure 4, see comment of Figure 4 below. Figure 4 Ponding occurs outside of the property boundaries. Suggest revision or amending the proposed design to eliminate ponding or obtain a recorded drainage easement or written permission from the appropriate property owner. Please refer to Section 2.3.1.5 (g), of the above reference Chapter 11. The offsite runoff from CP-5 and CP-6 is intended to flow from the west to the existing 18-foot spillway at CP-8. Contrary thereto, the proposed elevations, shown on Figure 4, will direct the runoff from CP-6 to the east. Please verify and coordinate the proposed flow patterns. GRADING COMMENTS: Sheet 1 Add symbol to legend – Clarify term “proposed Spot Grade” in legend. Sheet 2 Please provide elevations at all building corners Please provide details as to the method of handling the roof drainage. Please indicate the location and units of pavement section per Detail A3 The drainage arrows shown along the south boundary direction the offsite runoff from CP-5 and CP-6 conflict with the elevations. Please coordinate with the Drainage Report. Please coordinate the retention/detention volumes shown with the Drainage Report. Provide elevations along the proposed curb shown at the east side of the retention/detention basin. Please correct the sheet reference section A, B, C and D. The location shown for Section B2 should be placed at the weir location. Verify and correct the flow arrows shown along the concrete valley gutter. Elevations appear to conflict with the flow arrow direction. Please provide details for the proposed outlets at the spillways at both ends of the proposed three 24-inch RCP’s at the northwest property corner. Provide invert elevations for the 24- inch RCP’s. Profiles are recommended. Provide details for the proposed outlet and inlet for the proposed 3 –14” x 23” x 80’ elliptical RCP’s at the northeast property corner indicate if headwalls are proposed. The plan reference for these pipes doesn’t agree with the Drainage Report. The drainage arrows shown along the easterly P.A.A.L. are in conflict with the proposed elevations shown. Please coordinate this grading plan with the development plan. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Sheet 3 Please coordinate this plan with the grading plan and comments outline thereon. Verify the size shown (18”) PVC for the existing sewer at the northwest property corner. The plan shows 10” Identify the proposed 3 – 24” RCP’s at the northwest property corner and the proposed 3 –14” x 23” x 80’ elliptical RCP’s at the northeast property corner. Provide location, top of rim, and invert elevations fro all proposed cleanouts. Provide size and location of all proposed utilities. Identify proposed fire hydrant locations. Indicate the size and location of the proposed water and sewer lines. Proved horizontal control for the proposed water line extended from the easterly private P.A.A.L. to Headley road. Indicate it’s size, callout vends, valves, and the bury depth of the waterlines. Indicate if the contractor will be responsible for making the connection to the existing 8” water or by the City of Tucson. Sheet 4 Please refer to comments on the drainage report and grading plan. Sheet 5 Add slops on the pavement for Sections F and G. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: Sheet L-2 No trees or other types of plantings or items such landscape headers, irrigation valves, or other grade structures shall be allowed that may block or impede the operation of a drainage structure in any way. No landscaping features shall be allowed to disturb erosion control features such as concrete spillways, rip-rap spillways and other erosion control devices. Sincerely, WILLDAN David P. Gue, P.E. Supervising Engineer DPG/jk |
| 06/05/2007 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D06-0035 Valencia Car Wash Development Plan Resubmittal TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 5, 2007 DUE DATE: June 11, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Please add the lot split case number (S07-014) and date of approval (3/6/2007) in the lower right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, and NPPO. 2. Please label the required pathway way along the Santa Cruz West Branch as "Asphalt Pathway" to match the landscape plan. 3. Please include handicap ramp detail including truncated domes as a separate detail and as part of detail E. Curb ramps shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in width, exclusive of flared sides. The curb ramp flares shall not be steeper than 1:10. Counter slopes of adjoining gutters and road surfaces immediately adjacent to the curb ramp shall not be steeper than 1:20. The adjacent surfaces at transitions at curb ramps to walks, gutters and streets shall be at the same level. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details. ANSI 406.2, 3, & 4 The area covered by the truncated domes shall be twenty-four (24) inch deep and extend the full width of the crosswalk, preceding the crosswalk, including access aisles of handicapped motor vehicle parking spaces. 4. Include in keynote 9 that proposed sidewalks be physically separated from the PAAL by grade separation. DS 2-08.4.1 5. Please correct the required height of the handicap sign in detail M from thirty-six (36) inches to seven (7) feet per TDOT. 6. Please provide the number of required off-street loading spaces under required parking on sheet 1 of 5. Per LUC 3.4.5.3 Table 3, two (2) spaces are required for GFA between 10,001-30,000 sq. ft. LUC 3.4.5.3 7. Of the two (2) provided handicapped parking spaces one is required to be Van Accessible. Please indicate number of provided van accessible spaces under proposed parking on sheet 1 of 5 IBC1106.5 8. Please also provide the proposed FAR in percentage form (0.173) If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 791-5550, ext. 74960. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0035dpr.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 06/12/2007 | CDRC1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | >>> Jim Stoyanoff 06/12/2007 1:31 PM >>> No comments relating to this development, but the remainder of the re-zoned site will be subject to dedicating the remaining 200 ± feet of Headly Road not dedicated by Dkt 12953 Pg 6884. |
| 06/21/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: June 21, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D06-035: Valencia Car Wash: Development Plan Review(5-11-07) Denied. Indicate and show pathway will be ADA accessible and show how the linear park pathway will cross drainages. Drainages should be directed under pathway. In order to provide a minimum 30 ft wide corridor(measured from top of bank) for the linear park it appears that some of the corridor will be on the applicant's property. If this is the case, indicate dedication by fee or easement for a publicly accessible linear park corridor. Indicate paved asphalt pathway shall be constructed to the following specifications: 2" asphalt with 6" thickened edges over 4" compacted ABC. |
| 06/25/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 25, 2007 Bruce Wilson Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc. 4625 East Fort Lowell Road Tucson, Arizona 85712 Subject: D06-0035 Valencia Car Wash Development Plan Dear Bruce: Your submittal of May 11, 2007 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 6 Copies Revised Development Plan (Zoning, ESD, Engineering, Wastewater, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, DSD ) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 321-4625 |